Miranda Sinclaire is a 6th-grader in NYC, she's obsessed with A Wrinkle in Time, and lives with her petite, paralegal single mom. The mystery involves time travel, the topic of income level disparity is touched on in a sensitive manner, and it's nice to see the popular girl being black and a working-from-home parent being male for a change.
However, I sensed an element of unseemliness in the messaging, and I don't think a Newbury-award winner should glorify junk food or normalize petty theft. Miranda's mom swipes office supplies from her law firm because she hates her job, Miranda considers swiping fruit from her friendly neighborhood grocer, takes cash out of her mom's coat pocket without asking, and eats the last bag of Lay's from the supply of snacks to be donated to charity. I know it's common for kid characters in popular culture today to sass their parents, and for teachers to be disrespected, but in this book the police get out-witted and their authority ignored.
For years, my kids have been checking the weather and dressing appropriately for the elements, cutting their own fruit, and helping with cleaning the house - they are 10. In this book the harried single mom with the full-time job needs to cut her kid's apple, a dad is responsible for another kid's long white coat being kept clean, and when Miranda feels guilty about her own wrong-doing rather than apologize to her mom she refuses and after her mom finishes crying she takes the kid out to a movie.
I saw no reason for the author including a description of "the classic fake-Chinese act, stretching his eyelids back with two fingers, and bowing down low, saying 'velly important'" where there was no Asian character or impetus to speak of. Granted, Miranda does undergo a slight redemption arc, but with all the books out there, I don't understand how this one deserves to be voted "the most distinguished contribution to American literature for children". I just think we should raise that bar.
No comments:
Post a Comment